Lord Goldsmith: Jubilee Line Fraud Case: The trial judge in the case of R v Rayment & Others at the Central Criminal Court has today, 22 March 2005, discharged the jury, ending the proceedings.
	The trial dealt with an alleged fraud over contracts for the construction of London's Jubilee Line extension project. The prosecution arose from allegations that the defendants conspired to defraud London Underground by gaining access to confidential insider information, which was used against London Underground Limited's interests during the course of its dealings with tenderers and contractors on the Jubilee Line extension project. The information was relevant to the award of contracts worth tens of millions of pounds and two substantial claims for additional monies under contracts awarded in connection with the Jubilee Line extension project. The allegations also concerned corrupting public officials entrusted with safeguarding London Underground Limited's interests.
	Experienced lawyers considered the evidence in detail and a decision to prosecute was taken. Charges were brought in February 2000. Lord Williams, when he was Attorney-General, granted consent in February 2000 to prosecute the corruption case on the basis that there was sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and it was in the public interest to prosecute.
	The CPS was ready for trial in 2001 but the case was split into two trials. The first trial started with a jury on 26 June 2003. The case has been affected by delays and breaks. Time has been lost due to illness, scheduled holidays, periods of paternity leave, an operation and sickness of defendants. Legal argument has also involved substantial periods where the jury were not required to hear evidence. For example, in the last seven months the jury has heard evidence on only 13 days of the 140 available.
	The judge's ruling followed submissions by all parties in response to a request from the judge.
	Prosecuting counsel have advised that it is their clear view that there have been such delays and interruptions to this case that a fair trial is now impossible. Counsel formed a judgment that the case ought to be stopped. The DPP and I agree with that view and, therefore, approved prosecution counsel's statement to the trial judge informing her of this view.
	I agreed with the DPP last year the need for more control and robust management of large cases. The DPP has responded by developing a system, which will see a case management panel, chaired by the DPP, to consider the management of very large cases. The panel will consider issues such as the selection of charges, the number of defendants, likely number and length of trials and selection of trial advocates. It will also monitor progress of the case and key case management decisions during its life. It will be coupled with a similar process across the 42 CPS areas where chief crown prosecutors will review the most serious and lengthy cases in their areas. This will be implemented from 4 April 2005 and, I believe, offers real potential for getting a better grip on cases such as the current matter.
	In addition, the DPP has recently announced a new structure to deal with the most serious and complex cases in CPS headquarters. This will involve the DPP in more direct and substantial control over such cases. I welcome this restructuring.
	On 22 March the Lord Chief Justice issued a protocol for dealing with lengthy trials, which I welcomed. The protocol emphasises the need for robust and well informed case management to identify and allow the court to focus on the real issues in the case. The new protocol fits clearly with the criminal case management framework that I issued last July together with Lord Falconer, Baroness Scotland and the Lord Chief Justice. The protocol and framework will continue the culture change in the way in which all criminal justice practitioners operate. The public are entitled to an efficient and effective criminal justice system and cases such as the present one must never be allowed to happen again.
	This decision will cause great public disquiet as it causes me considerable disquiet. Most serious allegations have not in the end been brought to a final conclusion. It is important, and in the interest of the defendants, to underline that these allegations have not been proved and that they have maintained they are not guilty.
	Very considerable public money has been expended. Much time for a jury and for judge and defendants has been expended. It is important to learn what lessons we can. I have therefore asked Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of CPS, Stephen Wooler, to report to me on this case under Section 2(1)(b) of the CPS Inspectorate Act 2000. The terms of reference of this review will be drawn up shortly. The DPP has confirmed that the prosecution will provide full co-operation in this inquiry.

Lord Rooker: My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Planning has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I have today published two consultation papers on proposed secondary legislation and guidance to implement some of the development control provisions in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The papers take forward provisions to simplify and speed up the planning system and to facilitate greater community involvement.
	We are preparing to implement the development control provisions in Part 4 of the Act in stages. Where the provisions in the Act require secondary legislation we are proposing changes to the General Development Procedure Order (GDPO), the Listed Building Regulations and the Advertisement Regulations. We are considering responses to our first consultation paper entitled Changes to the Development Control System published on 30 November 2004. A further consultation paper Planning Control of Mezzanine and Other Internal Floor Space Additions was published on 3 March (Official Report, House of Commons; cols. 93–94 WS).
	Changes to the Development Control System Second Consultation Paper covers local development orders (LDO's). Local authorities will be able to grant permission for the type of development specified in the order. There will be no need for a planning application. It is envisaged that there will be reduced costs and greater certainty for developers, whether they be householders or businesses. Local authorities may benefit by dealing with fewer routine applications, thereby freeing resources for the consideration of more major applications. LDOs might potentially prove a useful tool for local authorities seeking to deliver high quality housing developments more quickly.
	The paper covers the interrelated subjects of outline planning permission, reserved matters and design and access statements. I announced in a Written Statement on 23 March 2004 (Official Report, House of Commons; cols. 48–50 WS) during the passage of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill that applications for outline planning permission must provide a level of information to assess all the significant environmental impacts. The paper proposes that applications should include information on use, quantum of development, indicative layout, scale parameters and indicative access points. It also proposes some amendments to reserved matters requiring further detailed information. The amendments include information on layout and scale. The new Act contains a requirement for both design and access statements. The Government now propose—for simplicity and efficiency—that one statement would cover both design and access. The purpose of the statement is to explain and justify the design and access principles and concepts on which a development proposal is based. Most applications for planning permission and all applications for listed building consent will need to be accompanied by a design and access statement. The length of statements should be proportional to the complexity of the application.
	The paper covers procedures for determining major applications. We plan to change an outdated provision in the GDPO that allows applicants to appeal major applications for non-determination after only eight weeks. This is an unreasonable turnaround time for local authorities, not to mention being out of kilter with government targets of 13 weeks. Our proposals would alter the period that an applicant must wait before appealing a major application to 13 weeks, harmonising government best value targets and government guidance with the relevant secondary legislation.
	The best practice guidance on the validity of planning applications published on 7 March was the first stage in clarifying planning practice in this area. The second stage, outlined in the consultation paper, is to clarify the idea of a "valid application". We want to specify in secondary legislation that a planning application is valid only when it contains all the information required by local authorities and when accompanied by the correct fee. This measure would cut down on the number of applications that go to the Planning Inspectorate on appeal without ever having been accepted as valid by a local authority and would generally increase the accessibility and transparency of the planning application process.
	We also want to use this opportunity to establish in secondary legislation the exact period of determination: from the first full day after a valid planning application has been received until the day on which a decision notice is dispatched.
	We intend that, after a 14-week consultation period and consideration of the responses received, the provisions would come into effect in the autumn.
	The other paper I am publishing today contains proposals for a standard application form for planning applications and related consent regimes. The paper refers to a prototype electronic application form called 1 APP which can be tested on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website. The prototype allows for householder applications, demolition in a conservation area and listed building consent. Our intention is to develop the electronic form to cover all related consent regimes, including outline and full planning permission, trees, advertisements, minerals and waste. In finalising the form we will take account of work under the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's householder development consents review. When the electronic form goes live, probably next year, people will be able to apply either on-line or on paper.
	Copies of the documents will be made available in the Libraries of the House.

Lord Rooker: My right honourable friend the Minister for Local and Regional Government has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today we are making a number of announcements relating to local government performance and the improvement of local services. We are publishing the fourth in a series of discussion documents taking forward the debate on the future of local government that we began last July with the publication of The Future of Local Government: Developing a 10 Year Vision.
	Securing Better Outcomes: Developing a New Performance Framework is intended to stimulate debate around the key principles that the Government consider should make up a new performance framework to secure more effective and efficient delivery of local services. The document is jointly published with the Treasury and, building on the devolving decision-making review last year, sets out a broad framework for developing a more devolved approach to delivery of local services, including increased personalisation of services. It emphasises:
	opportunities for users and residents to influence local priorities and the design and delivery of services—including through more choice and personalisation;
	a reduction in bureaucracy through a more coherent approach to managing performance, with clear national priorities, but with local government having the freedom to take responsibility for securing outcomes that meet the needs of their citizens and for improving their own performance in the way that the best councils are doing;
	more flexibility to enable faster and better tailored responses to local circumstances, building on the experience of local area agreements;
	the potential for developing an increasingly area-based approach between councils and their partners with greater focus on accountability between local partners in achieving common outcomes for the area;
	the importance of strategic, integrated relationship management through Government Offices to tailor negotiations, co-ordinate engagement and support, and challenge and respond to significant under-performance;
	the need for better and more transparent information to underpin any effective performance system.
	The discussion paper also expands on the Chancellor's Budget announcement about a rationalised inspection landscape, including the creation of a single local services inspectorate by 2008. This inspectorate will bring together the functions of the Audit Commission and the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate in relation to inspection of English local authorities. It will also have an important role as a gatekeeper and co-ordinator for all inspection of local authorities. The paper also looks at how inspection could be refocused in the longer term.
	Copies of the document have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses and are available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website www.odpm.gov.uk/localvision. I would urge those with an interest in local government to let us know their views on the issues discussed in this and the other discussion documents we have published.
	The Government's aim is to give people the powers and resources to have a greater influence over the key decisions which affect their community. The new local area agreements, which were the subject of the first Local:Vision discussion document, are one example of how we are enabling local authorities to work in partnership with other organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors to target resources on local priorities.
	The first 20 local area agreements (LAAs) will be signed today marking the successful completion of the negotiations on these pilots. The full, long-term agreements will be in place from 1 April 2005, enabling some £500 million of central government funding to be pooled or aligned locally to achieve better outcomes. The signing of these first LAAs means they can now be translated into better delivery of local public services. LAAs will simplify funding streams and help to join up public services. They will also enable local areas to have more freedom to work in innovative ways to benefit their communities.
	As well as celebrating the success of those involved in the first round of LAAs, today we are also laying out future developments for LAAs. This includes publishing the application criteria for a further 40 LAAs to be in place by April 2006. As with the first phase of pilot LAAs, the aim will be to ensure that there is a good regional spread of areas, a mix of single tier authorities and counties and linkages with other pilot initiatives in the next phase. Areas wishing to be in the next phase will have until mid-May to express an interest and areas selected will be announced in June.
	It will also be confirmed later today that responsibility for local public service agreement (LPSA) negotiations will be transferred from departmental teams to the Government Offices, also responsible for overseeing the negotiations for LAAs. LPSAs cover additional service targets agreed between central and local government, with the incentive of additional grant rewards if these targets are met. The second generation of LPSAs are increasingly focused on local priorities and are more rigorously outcome-based. Aligning LAAs and LPSAs will help make these initiatives mutually reinforcing, and maximise the potential benefits they offer.
	Today's signing ceremony, will also highlight the new LAA fourth block, which will focus on economic development. Where LAAs are in place the new local enterprise growth initiative (LEGI) will be channelled through this fourth block, as proposed in last week's Budget. LAAs will allow local authorities to pool this fund and other economic and enterprise funding streams in one place and to use them in a flexible way.
	I am also pleased to announce that as a result of the first round of the LPSA scheme 15 local authorities will receive reward grants totalling £93 million over the next two years. The councils, from across the country, have earned the reward grants for improving performance across a range of services to levels above those previously agreed.
	We have also launched a leaflet today bringing local government up to date with the joint Local Government Association/Office of the Deputy Prime Minister Capacity Building Programme. The Capacity Building Programme aims to support improvement in local government, by enhancing and developing councils' confidence, leadership, and skills to drive forward improvement as well as developing their capacity to learn, innovate and share knowledge and expertise about what works and how. The leaflet provides details of who is eligible to participate and how the programme can be accessed as well as encouraging local authorities to form improvement partnerships.
	Improvement partnerships are voluntary partnerships formed when a group of authorities and or fire and rescue authorities come together to improve their internal capacity either at regional or sub-regional level. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will make £57 million available from the Capacity Building Programme over the next three years to support these improvement partnerships.
	Several regions have work underway to develop improvement partnerships, the furthest advanced of which is the North West Improvement Network (NWIN). We will provide NWIN with £7.9 million over the next three years to support it in its work of creating a network of local authorities and other partners in the region committed to mutual improvement.
	These announcements show the Government's continuing commitment to working with local government to improve the outcomes for all our citizens, by allowing local authorities and their local partners more flexibility to be able to make the decisions about the issues that affect their areas.